22 Jul
2021
22 Jul
'21
9:55 p.m.
On Thu, Jul 22, 2021 at 02:50:24PM -0700, Daniele Ceraolo Spurio wrote:
<snip>
@@ -1756,15 +1796,119 @@ static int guc_context_alloc(struct intel_context *ce) return lrc_alloc(ce, ce->engine); } +static void guc_context_set_prio(struct intel_guc *guc,
struct intel_context *ce,u8 prio)+{
- u32 action[] = {
INTEL_GUC_ACTION_SET_CONTEXT_PRIORITY,ce->guc_id,prio,- };
- GEM_BUG_ON(prio < GUC_CLIENT_PRIORITY_KMD_HIGH ||
prio > GUC_CLIENT_PRIORITY_NORMAL);- if (ce->guc_prio == prio || submission_disabled(guc) ||
!context_registered(ce))return;- guc_submission_send_busy_loop(guc, action, ARRAY_SIZE(action), 0, true);
- ce->guc_prio = prio;
- trace_intel_context_set_prio(ce);
+}
+static inline u8 map_i915_prio_to_guc_prio(int prio) +{
- if (prio == I915_PRIORITY_NORMAL)
return GUC_CLIENT_PRIORITY_KMD_NORMAL;- else if (prio < I915_PRIORITY_NORMAL)
return GUC_CLIENT_PRIORITY_NORMAL;- else if (prio != I915_PRIORITY_BARRIER)
Shouldn't this be I915_PRIORITY_UNPREEMPTABLE?
No, I915_PRIORITY_UNPREEMPTABLE is an execlists only concept.
then we need a
/* we don't expect umpreemptable submissions with the GuC */ GEM_BUG_ON(prio == I915_PRIORITY_UNPREEMPTABLE)
Actually this probably should < I915_PRIORITY_DISPLAY as we really want pageflips to be high than any user context.
Matt
or something, because that prio level would be assigned incorrectly otherwise.
Daniele